brickipediafandomcom-20200229-history
Brickipedia:Requests for Bureaucrat/Archive
I am requesting to become a bureaucrat on this Brickipedia, because it is my favorite wiki; and I have been here for over 2 years. As an administer, I am very popular. I hope to become a bureaucrat, so I challenge myself to do more on this wiki. I will also put more time in creating better templates, codes, bots, and project to make the Brickipedia one of the best wikis of all time. --GOLDNINJAMX , (Talk) 21:26, September 12, 2015 (UTC) Support #--BubbleBomber: GoldNinjaMX should become a bureaucrat because he is a great editor, is ranked #32 on the wiki, and has make well over 3,000 edits. #--CreationBeTheWorld23: I've only known him for a tiny while, but I'm supporting anyway. #Absolutely deserving of the position! --[[User talk:LEGOFan999|'LEGOFan999']]King of Awesomeness #Gold's a pretty good guy. I think he could handle this well. - #I think you are ready. #He is ready. Xsizter (talk) 17:13, September 13, 2015 (UTC) #He's a great editor, admin, and would make a great bureaucrat. VesperalLight (talk) 16:05, September 14, 2015 (UTC) #GOLDNINJAMX is the best for this he is well deserved of this I am with him all the way Spiner wu aka Brennan September's 15 7:29 #He's a great guy, and is very much deserving of this job. He's done great as admin, and a feel that he'd do even better as bureaucrat! --LEGOBennyTheBrick3 (talk) 01:48, September 16, 2015 (UTC) #Thatstinkyguy-- GOLDNINJAMX FOR BUREAUCRAT! #you go! --TheBrickMan3 (talk) 03:02, September 19, 2015 (UTC) Oppose Neutral # I really don't think you are ready for this, but I am not going to oppose this. I think you could handle the rights if you got them.--Toa Matau 01:06, September 16, 2015 (UTC) Comments *I am no longer inactive. Has it been 2 months yet?--Toa Matau 02:14, August 9, 2015 (UTC) **Well, Benny said you were inactive until you get a new computer. You have not made any posts in a few weeks, So I thought you are inactivity. --GOLDNINJAMX (Talk) 04:28, August 9, 2015 (UTC) *Could you please freeze this poll until it has been two months? I didn't know you needed to be admin for two months first. GOLDNINJAMX (Talk) 02:27, August 10, 2015 (UTC) *Got it! :D --GOLDNINJAMX , (Talk) 23:29, September 28, 2015 (UTC) }} They made me put my name at the top, in case I forget it. Which does happen sometimes. Making this in case the admin goes through. STORMY FOR PREZ! Support #Since he's willing to stay, I feel comfortable with this. - #Definite support, mature user and I feel he could use the rights to his best ability. - Klint # Miss Lily The Toon 23:21, January 28, 2014 (UTC) #Brickipedia needs an active bureaucrat.-- Toa Matau 23:26, January 28, 2014 (UTC) #He's a great person. --Knight # As long as he can cook. Drewlzoo Neutral # Oppose #Does not meet the requirements for bureaucrat rights.-- Toa Matau 23:14, January 28, 2014 (UTC) #*I don't see any requirements other than the fact that I have to pass admin before. I posted an admin request, and we need to wait two weeks to see if it goes through. What other requirements am I unaware of? Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All (talk) 23:19, January 28, 2014 (UTC)Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All #**You need to be an admin for 2 months before you can successfully apply for bureaucrat. Shadowwarrior016 #***Hm. Guess there's that. But if CJC and AJR are leaving on Feb. 1st, unless there are any other admin candidates who want crat, DH and I will get the rights in order to keep the wiki running. Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All (talk) 15:49, January 29, 2014 (UTC)Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All #Not an admin... ~ CJC 16:43, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #What part of CJC and I still being here to grant rights requests isn't being communicated here? Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:53, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Legoboy 18:12, January 29, 2014 (UTC) Comments * With both AJR and CJC staying, there is no need for this. Request for closure. Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All (talk) 20:31, January 29, 2014 (UTC)Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All }} Darth henry So I have been admin here for an infinity, having no scandals. Therefore, I think that with most admins leaving, it would be appropriate for me to have 'crat in order to pass admin requests. Plus, the two current 'crats are leaving. Support #-- Toa Matau 02:16, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Play nice kiddies. :3 Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All (talk) 02:36, January 29, 2014 (UTC)Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All #If no one else will take this RfB seriously, I won't either. Sock vote! #Didn't realize this was serious, support then. -Klint #Balin supports. #-- 18:14, January 29, 2014 (UTC) # Oppose #I do not think you are ready for that responsibility. --Knight #You rarely do anything as admin. EDIT: actually no, you do nothing as admin. you're never on here, and even when you are, you do nothing. no mor admin for you --- CM4S (talk) 02:19, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Per CM4S. Too inactive -LFY1547 #Legoboy 18:12, January 29, 2014 (UTC) # "Since this admin, who has dedicated themselves to the Brickipedia community, or should have, given their role as an administrator, would rather stay behind the rest of the long-established community than to move forward with them, I do not trust this user holding these rights. Additionally, actions by Darth henry over the past few months have concerned me, such as him using his personal opinions on things being a basis for his actions, without putting forth effort to use neutrality and be unbiased." -- TheMachine.Wiki (talk) 19:38, January 29, 2014 (UTC) (I'm signing for ToaMeiko, per his request via Skype. This is a direct quote from what he told me on Skype.) :Please tell Meiko I am undecided about where I will be, I will most likely be between both. Ignoring Brickimedia completely is not an option. - Wanna help? 19:41, January 29, 2014 (UTC) ToaMeiko replied: "But by staying on the Wikia wiki, you're hurting the rest of the community's efforts at Brickimedia. If you want the community to prosper and its work to be worthwhile, you'd only contribute to one wiki-- either the one where all of Brickipedia's most useful contributors from over the years will be, or where there are more new users who spend the most time blogging and commenting rather than contributing to the encyclopedia." -- TheMachine.Wiki (talk) 19:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Mostly what the others have said, and 'm sorry to say that I've questioned your responsibilities as an admin in recent months. You are hardly here and don't edit much when you do, and sometimes the way you handle misbehavior is less than admirable. There is a screenshot TheRainbowDasher showed me which seemed a little to heavy on accusation for a user who has been a target for framing (via socks) in more than once case. There was also that discussion we had about racial slurs a few months ago. :/ Circumstances aside, I can't support this. 19:57, January 29, 2014 (UTC) Neutral #I'd like more detail involving your plans as 'crat and specific reasons for running before voting either way. BrickfilmNut (talk) 02:26, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :As AJR and CJC are leaving, we will have 0 crats here. Also, I will need to review admin requests after everyone leaves. 02:32, January 29, 2014 (UTC) ::ahem soh and I --- CM4S (talk) 02:33, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :::I'll still be here to review RfAs. Ajraddatz (Talk) 03:03, January 29, 2014 (UTC) ::::Per Ajr. ~ CJC 16:43, January 29, 2014 (UTC) # I don't feel you are mature enough, or really have been productively editing lately. Since your whole "retard" comment, I really doubt your abilities to administrate. Per BFN, and Knight. -- 04:13, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :About that, I was unaware that it was offensive, where I live we sling it around instead of curse words. I was unaware that it would offend anyone and haven't used it since. 04:17, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :: But it still is against common sense. I just don't think you are mature enough for this role, anyway. -- 04:23, January 29, 2014 (UTC) Comments * Request for closure. I'll try again eventually. - Wanna help? 21:40, January 29, 2014 (UTC) }} Shadowwarrior016 I think that I should be bureaucrat because I have been on here for a while now and 2 months as an admin. I will be one of those people who is trustworthy and reliable. I will continue to stay on Brickipedia but will travel between the two sites. Please also note that I am on when there are hardly any bureaucrats/admins online during that period so I will be able to assist during that time. Thanks Support # Oppose #Literally 0 admin actions, and not much interaction with other people. Not sure what I'm supposed to be supporting by here. Ajraddatz (Talk) 16:52, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Per Ajr. -- 17:32, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Legoboy 18:12, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Per Ajr. 21:50, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Now I have time to actually look into it, per Ajr. You got admin in December, then disappeared until a few days ago, then make this. ~ CJC 23:31, January 29, 2014 (UTC) Neutral #I don't understand the need for crat rights if they are only used to give other people rights. I'd support for admin (if you already weren't) and I'll probably change this to support later. Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All (talk) 15:52, January 29, 2014 (UTC)Stormageddon: Dark Lord of All #I'd have to know you better, I haven't had any interaction with you whatsoever. 15:53, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #Activity concerns. ~ CJC 16:46, January 29, 2014 (UTC) #-- Toa Matau 18:13, January 29, 2014 (UTC) # - Comments *Ok can I request for closure. User:Shaddowwarrior016 }} CzechMate Well, yup. I am nominating myself for bureaucrat rights. * I am active enough. I plan on being much more active, too. * I am trusted with administrator rights. And this right is basically an add-on where I can help out by closing requests, and add administrator to accounts. * And in the words of others - we do need more crats around. * I was a 'crat at the Customs Wiki on 'media, so I know how it works. So, yeah. If you oppose this, please state reasons, I will try and reply. -- 05:13, September 3, 2013 (UTC) Support #Definite support. Czech has become one of my best friends at Brickipedia in the past few months, and he's a great member of the community. Czech is responsible, respectful, and reasonable. He's always there when I need him, or an admin in general (except of course when time zones are way different, but that's not his fault. :3), and he's very helpful for both advice and just as a friend and wiki admin in general. He's also quite active in all namespaces on the wiki, which is a good characteristic to have in someone. I definitely trust bureaucrat rights in CzechMate, as he's been on of the most mature and responsible admins I've seen (who doesn't already have bureaucrat rights). Good luck, broski! :) --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:16, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #A great, active trustworthy user. I actually thought he was one already. Legosuperheroesfan (talk) 14:44, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #Per Meiko. Czech always keeps his cool, which is important for ANY staff member. And with the different time zones it helps keep this wiki safe 24/7! --Village.gw105 (talk) 23:55, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #:Notice to admins: before you go striking this, the user, on their old account, has , thus their vote is valid. --ToaMeiko (talk) 00:04, September 4, 2013 (UTC) #<3 MsDtalk 01:16, September 7, 2013 (UTC) #Though sometimes you may be a jerk, you are a great friend and I trust you more than many people on the wiki. You do have some issues, everyone does, especially me, but I still trust you completely. --Knight Neutral # Czech is a really responsible user, however, I don't think I could lean on any side. - 10:18, September 3, 2013 (UTC) # I wasn't sure, until reading the votes below. You've been an amazing friend, but I have to agree with Boba, especially. Drewlzoo : I'm gonna stand aside here and vote neutral. This vote is subject to change. MsDtalk 12:22, September 3, 2013 (UTC) Oppose # This nomination surprised me, and in turn my vote is probably a little surprising to some people. Czech is a good friend and for the most part a beneficial member of the community, but there have been a number of incidents dotting his time here, including the recent mocking of Mr. Brix's logo contest (which was done with CM4S and one other user, I think). There are also some other vague issues I have, things I can't quite put my finger on. He also recently started saying he should be stripped of his rights because of the incident with Brix's contest, even saying things like he "doesn't need the rights anymore", which is why this nomination surprised me; I'm wondering now if the humility had been playing to the crowd. And lastly, Bureaucrat is more of an honorary position now--as we already have enough--and in my opinion the only one of the current admins really deserving of it is Berrybrick. -- 05:51, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #:That incident with Brix was several weeks ago, and Czech apologized very sincerely to Brix about it. I think Czech and the community could benefit more with him having these rights than without. In my opinion, based on your opposition reason, it would make more sense as a "Still has some room for improvement, but does well overall on the wiki" neutral vote, or however you'd phrase it. One mistake, especially one that is relatively old, and the fact that the user has not made such a mistake since, is not a reason to oppose in my opinion. It's a reason to be neutral at most. Like I, and others have said, in the current RfCM requests and my RfA nomination, look at the numerous positives, and don't just home in on one mistake. There are more reasons why Czech should have these rights than there are reasons why he should not. These are just my opinions, I'm not arguing your reasoning, but I think it makes more sense as a neutral vote. --ToaMeiko (talk) 05:57, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #::It was the recent past; not nearly enough time to see if it won't occur again. And my other reasons still stand. However, your opinion is noted. -- 06:01, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #:(irrelevant but in) I thought Berry had 'crat? ~ CJC 10:54, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #::Heh, so did I. I thought we made it a rule that you had to have 'crat to have CU. Oh well :S 13:34, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #:He doesn't even use admin rights for anything but seemingly personal decisions (hate to bring it up again, but such as CM4S). MsDtalk 12:14, September 3, 2013 (UTC) # Sorry Czech, like Jeyo, don't get me wrong, I like you a lot. But with recent things happening recently (the Mr. Brix blog thing with CM4S, and then the perma-ban of CM4S which I really don't understand ), I can't really support this right now. If you posted it a couple of weeks ago, I would have supported without even thinking 13:34, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #Per Jeyo, partially. Czech, you are an awesome friend, but why do you feel that you need the rights? It seems kind of sudden. BrickfilmNut (talk) 16:43, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #Per Jeyo. 22:52, September 3, 2013 (UTC) #To make a user a Bureaucrat is to make their power permanent. If there is not an immediate need for Bureaucrats - say, all current Bureaucrats are retiring/retired, and if the person has done anything significant as of late that reflects negatively on them, then making them essentially unpunishable is not a good idea. Yes, Wikia can remove their rights, but from what I know, they act quite slowly. I have nothing against Czech as a person, I just feel that this is best for now. - BF2 Talk 00:10, September 4, 2013 (UTC) #:I hope my vote is valid. I do have more than 100 mainspace edits, although I haven't edited in a while. - BF2 Talk 00:14, September 4, 2013 (UTC) #::Quite valid; you have over 17,000 mainspace edits. -- 00:18, September 4, 2013 (UTC) #Take a bit of NHL, a bit of Boba and a sprinkling of BFN, and you get my vote. My attempts to change my original view failed I'm afraid. ~ CJC 12:16, September 4, 2013 (UTC) #I gotta kinda agree with everyone up here. - 18:05, September 7, 2013 (UTC) Comments *Regarding MsD's original oppose reason: 3:28:10 PM CM4S: Czech for bcrat 3:28:11 PM CM4S: what 3:28:17 PM Andrew (MsD): idk 3:28:28 PM Andrew (MsD): I went neutral because I saw a really big argument coming 3:28:38 PM Andrew (MsD): He's like 2-3 anyways 3:30:28 PM CM4S: I dont' even like him as admin 3:30:38 PM Andrew (MsD): he doesn't even use his rights 3:30:42 PM Andrew (MsD): and when he does it's biased 3:32:13 PM CM4S: say that and oppose him 3:32:14 PM CM4S: :P Relevant. --ToaMeiko (talk) 23:14, September 3, 2013 (UTC) :MsD came up with all the reasons. Sci just told him to. If MsD didn't want to oppose, he wouldn't have. And it looks like he didn't, although I'm not sure if he was pressured to do that or not. -- 17:58, September 4, 2013 (UTC) ::That conversation was actually several hours after I opposed. MsDtalk 22:32, September 4, 2013 (UTC) * Neutral. If you are leaving what is the purpose of getting the rights? Klagoer ** To secure them for the future, I assume. When I officially left, Ajraddatz removed my rights because I wasn't using them, which is fair (then I sort of came back and lost them). That said, it doesn't seem to apply to a lot of admins, but oh well. - BF2 Talk 02:32, September 7, 2013 (UTC) ***Am tempted to remove all inactive admins' flags, but that would require a discussion first. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:43, September 7, 2013 (UTC) ****A discussion should be undertaken. I do agree with your reasoning for removing inactive admins' flags. - BF2 Talk 03:28, September 7, 2013 (UTC) }} King of Nynrah has been with us ever since the good old days. He's is active almost everyday, and a very responsible individual. Nothing would be wrong having one more 'crat... 18:33, April 1, 2012 (UTC) Support *HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [[User:Prisinorzero|'Prisinor']][[User_talk:Prisinorzero|'zero']] 18:53, April 1, 2012 (UTC) * first sensible nom of the day --Brick bobby - maze of the heroes RPG 18:55, April 1, 2012 (UTC) *Well I say: YES! Excellent user, worthy of Beurocracy. -- 18:56, April 1, 2012 (UTC) * Sure! 20:55, April 1, 2012 (UTC) * Much better than that MEGA BLOKS guy... 21:26, April 1, 2012 (UTC) ** YOU LIE! TAKE IT BACK! 15:45, April 5, 2012 (UTC) *OH YEAH! You have all my support--WCDDoherty 21:32, April 1, 2012 (UTC) *Sure, if he really feels he would benefit from it :P 22:53, April 1, 2012 (UTC) * 23:16, April 1, 2012 (UTC) *YESH! 02:10, April 2, 2012 (UTC) *Okay. -Lego Whovian 08:46, April 2, 2012 (UTC) * 10:24, April 2, 2012 (UTC) * - *fine--ToaMatau2004talk 22:24, April 2, 2012 (UTC) * 06:59, April 5, 2012 (UTC) * Don't see why not... * After stalking KoN's activity and the fact he's been here since 2009 and he only became an admin last year, I do support -- 10:38, April 5, 2012 (UTC) * Okay. --BLK T 10:52, April 5, 2012 (UTC) * EXTREME SUPPORT: DEFINITELY!!! * Oh course! 15:48, April 5, 2012 (UTC) * I like him. * What Czech said. -- 07:35, April 9, 2012 (UTC) * He helps the wiki a lot! *'SUPPORT' Great friend, helps out a lot and great contributions. Just a great user all round. * - CJC 11:18, April 10, 2012 (UTC) * -sigh- WTH, he's an awesome friend and deserves this. Go get 'em, buddy! ::Yay :D - 21:57, April 10, 2012 (UTC) * The exception to "No user is perfect," He's got da stuff. 110% support. - 17:49, April 11, 2012 (UTC) * Per Ajr. :) 09:58, April 13, 2012 (UTC) Neutral * I think KoN is awesome but, we do seem to have enough though though, feel free to remove this. -- 08:04, April 4, 2012 (UTC) *I've decided to go neutral on all Bcrat requests unless all the other Bureaucrats are inactive, or of course, if the user would misuse the rights. I think KoN is currently the user that deserves it most out of all of those who don't have the rights, but I base my vote on who's active first. **He is actually really active, have you seen his contribs? -- 10:54, April 6, 2012 (UTC) Oppose *nah-User:Mr.Brick :* Elaborate more, or I will strike your vote. 03:37, April 2, 2012 (UTC) ::*Struck for no reason given. 23:04, April 2, 2012 (UTC) :::* You sillies ;) There's no need for this striking thing; a bureaucrat reviewing this argument can tell that it doesn't weigh much. FB100Z • talk • 02:21, April 3, 2012 (UTC) ::::*Hehe, I like how you said how it didn't "weigh much". :P 02:36, April 3, 2012 (UTC) :::::* ;D - 14:58, April 3, 2012 (UTC) Comments * Yeah, I've accepted. :P Cheers to Tat for nominating me. - 18:37, April 1, 2012 (UTC) ** CHEERS ! *tat cheers his glass* 18:41, April 1, 2012 (UTC) *I can't remember, is his semi-activity over? 23:19, April 1, 2012 (UTC) * Yes I believe it is. He's been on chat and editing quite a lot lately. :@ 23:21, April 1, 2012 (UTC) ::Yeah, my semi-activity was only for a while earlier on this year. It probably won't happen again. - 07:54, April 2, 2012 (UTC) *If tat gave you the nom why does he oppose? A bit strange dont you think?--WCDDoherty 21:55, April 10, 2012 (UTC) ::He commented on an opposition, he didn't actually oppose. - 21:57, April 10, 2012 (UTC) *is he a cat yet [[User:Prisinorzero|'Prisinor']][[User_talk:Prisinorzero|'zero']] 10:14, April 12, 2012 (UTC) ::Three days 'till voting ends. ;) - 10:50, April 12, 2012 (UTC) }} Cligra 00:42, February 24, 2012 (UTC) *Oh, hell yeah!!! Go Cliggers!! =D --Lord Shu 00:47, February 24, 2012 (UTC) *Great admin, no harm in giving him that huge step up to bureaucrat. 00:47, February 24, 2012 (UTC) * I think I can trust Cligra with having the ability to tick one more box in Special:Userrights :P 01:56, February 24, 2012 (UTC) * Per others 17:59, February 24, 2012 (UTC) * Per everyone, one problem is that he welds dogs in his spare time so I advise a visit to a psychiatrists first [[User:Prisinorzero|'Prisinor']][[User_talk:Prisinorzero|'zero']] 18:01, February 24, 2012 (UTC) * 'Bout time this happened! 01:38, February 29, 2012 (UTC) * A user devoted to the wiki, no reason not to support. --Brick bobby 18:26, February 29, 2012 (UTC) * * Per Ajr and NHL. :) 20:18, March 1, 2012 (UTC) *No reason to oppose and LOTS of reason to support! [[User:Darth henry|'Father' ]][[User talk:Darth henry|'and' ]][[special:contributions/Darth henry|''' Son']] May the force be with you. 23:08, March 1, 2012 (UTC) * A great user. 00:01, March 2, 2012 (UTC) * - CJC 18:51, March 2, 2012 (UTC) * Hardworking and devoted user, deserves another promotion. ;) - 18:54, March 2, 2012 (UTC) *i dont see why not!-Mr.Brick *Totally! He deserves it! Ebilwgrevious 14:32, March 5, 2012 (UTC)Ebilwgrevious *SO. MUCH. BRICKING. YES! Awesome friend/editor to the wiki, no WAY he shouldn't lose! * He Deserves to Be a Bureaucrat, He is on every day, active on chat, made thousands of edits, and is a great Admin, and a great Friend. * 08:26, March 8, 2012 (UTC) *He deserves it. To me, I think his the most trusted user for the position of Bureaucrat. - 06:24, March 9, 2012 (UTC) * Well of course. It's about time this guy got his gold throne like CJC's. :P 07:13, March 9, 2012 (UTC) :*CJC has '''platinum'. Neutral * Per Ajr's great point below. Drewlzoo(talk) (blogs) Oppose * Absolutely nothing whatsoever against Cligra. If any admin where to get Bureaucrat, I would pick him, but there is no reason at all to have more bureaucrats. There's already a bunch of active ones. Drewlzoo(talk) (blogs) **We have only 1 active crat. -_--- 00:50, February 24, 2012 (UTC) *** CJC, Ajr, me (who is sort of active), SKP, and well TGE hasn't been on for a bit, but there's definitely more than 1. 01:56, February 24, 2012 (UTC) ****There's also no reason to not have more bureaucrats. If more people want to be able to close the rare RfAs that pop up/flag bots, why shouldn't we allow more volunteers? Anyone who is trusted with access to the abusefilter, mediawiki interface, block, etc can be trusted with three more boxes to check in Special:UserRights. 02:01, February 24, 2012 (UTC) ***** We can flag bots? I thought only BAG people were allowed to it that (I know know we can technically do it, but I still thought it was a BAG thing) 02:04, February 24, 2012 (UTC) ****** I suppose that's something that was never really defined (nor does it really need to be). Still, if some day the majority of BAG members couldn't flag bots then some bureaucrat could do it per request. Users could also request the bot flag temporarily if they were going to flood the RC with some task, although I'm the only one who has ever done that. 02:06, February 24, 2012 (UTC) Comments *Yes he's accpeted through Chat. -- 00:42, February 24, 2012 (UTC) }} Ajraddatz 03:55, November 7, 2011 (UTC) Support *Oh well, I've nominated Ajr (I’m one of the five), and I'll still nominate him... Support - per "nominating" him. :D 04:00, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * I asked ajr a while ago. Also 100 Days for me! 04:29, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * Wow, being able to tick an admin box- big change in rights :P There really isn't any difference between admin and b'crat these days, don't see how just giving b'crat to any admin would hurt. 05:35, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * YES: Very mature, friendly, and has good edits. 12:44, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * Sure! 13:35, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * - - Lest we forget - CJC 17:38, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * 20:56, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * Strong Support. 08:02, November 9, 2011 (UTC) * I have been waiting for this day to come. Out of anyone and everyone, I think Ajr deserves it most of all. 110% support! - 16:46, November 12, 2011 (UTC) * Aye -[[User:King of Nynrah|'KoN']] [[User talk:King of Nynrah|'Talk']] 18:06, November 12, 2011 (UTC) * *'Support' removing the Neutral and Oppose sections :P FB100Z • talk • 23:38, November 19, 2011 (UTC) Comments :From five days ago: I actually have no desire to be a bureaucrat - Ajr -- lol 04:25, November 7, 2011 (UTC) ::tbh I've never actually really thought about it until now, and now I don't see why not actually :p 04:26, November 7, 2011 (UTC) * 05:35, November 7, 2011 (UTC) *This request should be ending... now :D! 00:49, November 21, 2011 (UTC) }} SKP4472 23:16, August 24, 2011 (UTC) *he deserves it. funny i always thought you had the rights * SKP is a great user. He deserves it. User:Grovyle4life/sig *'Support' Why not? *'Support', since the two active crats don't feel like doing actual crat stuff, we must need another one. 21:22, August 31, 2011 (UTC) *'Support' I'm still new as a crat, and I need as much help as possible. * yes, thumbs up from me! --Power Jim 11:31, September 3, 2011 (UTC) *Good user--[[User:Munchman14|'Munchman']][[User talk:Munchman14|'14']] 11:46, September 3, 2011 (UTC) *'Support' Per Ajr and the Grand Editor Berrybrick (Talk) 11:48, September 3, 2011 (UTC) *'Support' - Sounds like a good idea. FB100Z • talk • 01:08, September 6, 2011 (UTC) Neutral *'Neutral' I don't want oppose, you don't deserve that. But I don't know if your time for bcrat is just yet. - 17:07, August 25, 2011 (UTC) *Per NBP. *You have been a great help to me, but per NBP. -- - In Range. Take a Shot. 02:34, August 29, 2011 (UTC) *'Neutral'- I'm sure you wouldn't abuse the powers, but I'm not sure that we need another one at the moment. 01:31, September 6, 2011 (UTC) Oppose * Mildly-Strong Oppose - We have one Bureaucrat (Kingcjc) who is Semi-active, and TheGrandEditor who is clearly "super active" as I may say. We also have Nighthawk leader. And it's not like we get RfAs every so hour. :) Nothing personal against the nominee. ;) 06:43, August 25, 2011 (UTC) ::No offense taken. You have made a perfectly valid and legitimate point. :) 17:24, August 25, 2011 (UTC) Comments *Has the user accepted the nomination? - 23:20, August 24, 2011 (UTC) **Accepted via chat. Thanks for the nomination! :) 13:59, August 25, 2011 (UTC) * Thank you everyone for voicing your opinion, it's really appreciated! :) 20:32, August 31, 2011 (UTC) * Well, I thought SKP would get a few votes! He's a wonderful user! -- 22:39, September 2, 2011 (UTC) I'm presuming that this would be pass? I don't know whether Neutral stands for anything. 18:37, September 7, 2011 (UTC) Nah it dosnt add anything it just means they dont want to oppose you but they are just not sure. --Crazed Penguin talk 21:18, September 7, 2011 (UTC) }} TheGrandEditor # Definetly, between his editing skills, his ability to handle vandalism so well, and his maturity, this user would make a perfect bcrat now. Even though he doesn't have as much experience as I'd like, I still think he deserves it. - 13:03, July 20, 2011 (UTC) # i know this user hasn`t had much time here but i think this user way deserves this right! 01:33, July 21, 2011 (UTC) # Per Nerfblasterpro. :) 16:07, July 21, 2011 (UTC) #'Strong Support'. TheGrandEditor is one of the few truly mature users, and even adminsistraotrs here at Brickipedia. I would rather have this user a bureaucrat than some other admins. I also admire his outstanding grammar, and clean language. And yes, with his edits, the amount of time he has been here does not matter. 03:54, July 23, 2011 (UTC) #Per the others. #Sure. 03:25, July 24, 2011 (UTC) #Definitely. #[[User:Agent Charge|'Agent']] [[User talk:Agent Charge|'Charge: ']] Down with Vandalism 01:50, August 2, 2011 (UTC) Oppose #One year? I think bureaucrats should at least have been here for two years. 21:56, July 20, 2011 (UTC) Comments * Has the user accepted the nomination? - Kingcjc 10:45, July 19, 2011 (UTC) * Yes, and tomorrow, I'm going to give a better reason for why I should be a bureaucrat. Right now, I really need some sleep. =( :*Cool! 05:30, July 20, 2011 (UTC) * In response to User:Mykheh, most of the people who have been here for more than two years are either already a bcrat, or left editing here (other than NBP, who had a temporary hiatus, but is otherwise with us again). :*We all have our views and feelings. I am just utilizing my voting privileges here at Brickipedia. 22:06, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::*How Nice. I currently just utlizing my nonexistent voting priviledges too. O< and I have views and feelings too, except I'm too low and "inexperienced" to be able to freerly express them. 01:31, July 21, 2011 (UTC) :::*Don't you just love community cabals? FB100Z • talk • 00:46, July 23, 2011 (UTC) :Two years as an admin, or two years on Brickipedia? 22:40, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::*Brickipedia. 22:42, July 20, 2011 (UTC) ::: The fact is, you only really need to be here four months and have more than a thousand edits to become a bcrat, and that's only if you are already an admin and are extremely good. *Happybrick: You don't have enough edits yet, or in other words not "old enough" to vote right now. 03:44, July 23, 2011 (UTC) *'Request for closure' - Houston, we have consensus. FB100Z • talk • 18:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC) }} Nerfblasterpro 15:24, July 12, 2011 (UTC) P.S. You know it's worth a try ;) Support # # #My first true friend on Brickipedia. #No words. Just da vote -----> # (feel free to strike me since I'm not actually here anymore) 01:34, July 13, 2011 (UTC) #Honesty and transparencty. That's what makes Nerfblastertrpo good. And that's why he'g got my vote. 05:25, July 13, 2011 (UTC) #*How nice, I'm being silenced for having too little edits. I suppose I must resort to making crappy edits then have the ability to vote. How sad. 01:46, July 17, 2011 (UTC) #**You can now feel my pain :P It's actually my fault, since I wanted to set up a vote and get it over with, but I overestimated the general intelligence of the community. I had no idea so many of us were half-witted fascist cattle. FB100Z • talk • 16:38, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #***Yes, Brotehr FB. I've joines the club. 06:16, July 19, 2011 (UTC) # Nuff said. :D 10:53, July 13, 2011 (UTC) # I don't see why not. --- The dawn is coming... # Long time contributor, great friend and a perfect successor to Nighthawk. Also, can we vote twice? (Just kidding. He deserves it though) [[User:GameGear360|'GG ']][[User talk:GameGear360|'360']] 12:59, July 13, 2011 (UTC) # Okay so, next Samdo and Ajr, then I'm next!!!! (In terms of when we joined) 01:13, July 14, 2011 (UTC) [[User:Agent Charge|'Agent']] [[User talk:Agent Charge|'Charge: ']] Down with Vandalism 04:03, July 14, 2011 (UTC) # I got your back. # Creepy, but responsible and mature enough for b'crat tools. FB100Z • talk • 18:55, July 14, 2011 (UTC) :Mature? hehe that's funny :P Creepy? hehe that's true. - 19:13, July 14, 2011 (UTC) #'Support'. After some consideration, I support this request. 21:23, July 15, 2011 (UTC) #--R2-D2 (user) 21:30, July 15, 2011 (UTC) #* Ha! I knew it! It's a conspiracy against me. Why would someone only cross out my vote, when there this dude who also should have his vote crossed according to that "rule". Hmm? 15:44, July 17, 2011 (UTC) #**I really could be doing something better than checking edit counts >_> - Kingcjc 16:18, July 17, 2011 (UTC) #**You see? The rule is only applied when used against someone you don't like. FB100Z • talk • 16:39, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #***Whose that aimed at? - Kingcjc 08:00, July 19, 2011 (UTC) #****Lol, obviously someone hates my guts. :P 01:01, July 21, 2011 (UTC) # Great user! Bureaucrat privileges would just help him do better things. I give him 100%.G4 23:23, July 20, 2011 (UTC) # 16:09, July 21, 2011 (UTC) # You got my vote [[User:Agent Charge|'Agent']] [[User talk:Agent Charge|'Charge: ']] Down with Vandalism 23:52, July 31, 2011 (UTC) #:Vote was concluded before this vote was added - just seems no-one archived it... - Kingcjc 08:45, August 1, 2011 (UTC) Oppose # Dont need another crat, your not active, the fact you have been for a few days in the last year or more is not enough Gladiatoring 03:17, July 16, 2011 (UTC) #* You're surely joking, Gladiatoring. For Mr. M rfa, you said yea because he's a person. So what's with this? 01:42, July 17, 2011 (UTC) #Yes, per above. 16:42, July 16, 2011 (UTC) #*NHL left, and Darth Smith already left = 1 bureaucrat. Wikis usually have more than one. 02:25, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #:but he logged in on the 4th of July this year! 02:37, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #::Yes, but he left on the 7th of July. 02:41, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #:::Just outta curiosity, would Darth Smith have the right amount of edits/experience to be a Bcrat anyways? :P - 12:51, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #::::probably not, but hes the founder after all. :P Someone like...me an innovatwr. 15:34, July 18, 2011 (UTC) #'Oppose'. I think not. We need a user who is...what's the word...like Samdo994- a high level of maturity. 22:13, July 20, 2011 (UTC) #:I'm confused, was it something I said that made you change your mind so abrubtly? And what do you mean level of maturity? Hmmm - 22:50, July 20, 2011 (UTC) #Not really active, at least get back into things here... 04:04, July 24, 2011 (UTC) Comments # . I don't always read through all the Blogs/Forums, I usually just skip to the good part" - Join the club - Kingcjc 15:29, July 12, 2011 (UTC) #* I know it sounds weird, what I'm trying to say (I think) is I look at all the forums, but if it's a long discussion I usually just comment on my opinion instead of jumping in (Usually because I just don't like to read through all the debates). Same with blogs, I don't always read all of the comments. Usually just the blog itself, and few recent comments. - 15:41, July 12, 2011 (UTC) #**I think few people actually read all of the comments/discussion, myself included. #***I do :P Maybe I'm just OCD. FB100Z • talk • 04:21, July 16, 2011 (UTC) * Wait, why is Jag's vote crossed out? Just wondering... - 01:14, July 14, 2011 (UTC) :*Not my vote, just the reason- I don't really want crat, just a joke really, so I crossed it out so nobody would think I really meant it. 01:17, July 14, 2011 (UTC) ::*Ohh, ok. Haha thank you for your vote nevertheless :) - 01:18, July 14, 2011 (UTC) * Neutral Eh, Samdo is more mentally sophisticated in Wikia dealings, and is not as crazy you.:) (JK) 21:42, July 15, 2011 (UTC) *My goodness, you people need to learn how to format votes correct :3 03:25, July 24, 2011 (UTC) :*So I assume we should archive this...as successful or failed? I believe due to only being 70% support, it is considered failed? - 14:04, July 29, 2011 (UTC) ::It's 0.789473684210526 percent support. So, I'd take it as 80. What's the margin again? 19:43, July 29, 2011 (UTC) :::That made my day that you actually came up with that number. :D I believe the margin is actually 80%, which means I should have it then... O_o I think? - 20:06, July 29, 2011 (UTC) ::::Oops no, 78.9473684210526 percent, not less than one. It's just 15 divided by 19. 20:34, July 29, 2011 (UTC) :::::The support to oppose ratio is not 80%, so the nomination should not go through. 20:41, July 29, 2011 (UTC) So the result appears to be failed. I can't archive it, but if someone else could that'd be great. - 23:14, July 29, 2011 (UTC) ---- }} TheGrandEditor 13:44, May 3, 2011 (UTC) # It doesn't hurt anyone. # I see no reason why not. ...Half Way out of the Dark... 19:32, May 7, 2011 (UTC) # He really is a great editor, and he would not do any wrong editing.--Makuta Tarkairadan 18:27, May 8, 2011 (UTC) Oppose #I dunno... I don't think that we need too many crats, and I'd like to see samdo on the throne myself :3 03:42, May 2, 2011 (UTC) #:Wait, we get thrones? cjc 19:23, May 2, 2011 (UTC) #::Yes, but not you :P 13:27, May 3, 2011 (UTC) #:::Makes sense for everyone but King'cjc to get a throne :) 13:44, May 3, 2011 (UTC) # Nighthawk is back, if he leaves again I will change my mind Arc comander Jim 18:19, May 2, 2011 (UTC) #Noting personal TGE, but with Nighthawk the awesome "back" and passing by the site every so-and-so times I just see no need for another one at the current time. 17:39, May 8, 2011 (UTC) #Can't say I know this guy enough, but I don't think we currently need another crat. I wish I had a pertty little throne lk you guys... :P -Nerfblasterpro: 01:16, May 15, 2011 (UTC) Comments *I'll take NHL's usual job of asking "had the user accepted the nomination"? 21:49, May 1, 2011 (UTC) :*Yes. 21:52, May 1, 2011 (UTC) :*Yes he has accepted. Mr. Minifigure 21:58, May 1, 2011 (UTC) :* How come I never get to say that? :P cjc 21:59, May 1, 2011 (UTC) Im neutral, I mean do we need new bureaucrats or not? Does some one become a bureaucrat because of their work or because we need more? :I'd say wait until we only have one active/none active ones, having two that keep checking are enough for now. 16:04, May 6, 2011 (UTC) ::I think someone needs to fill out the reason section at the top. --TheGrandEditor 19:16, May 7, 2011 (UTC) }} Cpatain Rex 09:07, September 2, 2010 (UTC) Support # As nominator 09:07, September 2, 2010 (UTC) # 06:19, September 3, 2010 (UTC) # As longs as he doesn't take another unexpected long leave [[User:Clone Commander Fox|'Clone Commander ']][[User talk:Clone Commander Fox|'Fox]] 02:22, September 5, 2010 (UTC) # Definitely. 05:22, September 5, 2010 (UTC) Oppose #I dunno... I don't think that we need two new bureaucrats. It looks like User:Kingcjc is going to pass his RfB, and that should be fine. 04:49, September 6, 2010 (UTC) Comments *Please don't take my oppose the wrong way. I think that you are a great editor and admin, but we will have enough crats IMO. 04:49, September 6, 2010 (UTC) * Struck my own vote. Sorry Rex, it's nothing personal, and I'd still be happy to see you get the right, and wouldn't ever oppose, but you're kind of inactive again (no contributions for 20 days), so don't really see the point in giving additional rights to inactive users. 04:50, October 16, 2010 (UTC) *This has been open forever. Can someone please close it? 00:01, November 1, 2010 (UTC) ** Closed. This nomination began before the new rules, but I don't think a +2 vote was ever considered to be enough to grant a user right. 07:54, November 1, 2010 (UTC) }} Kingcjc 09:05, September 2, 2010 (UTC) Support # As nominator 09:05, September 2, 2010 (UTC) # Hell yes!!!! --[[User:Lcawte|'Lewis Cawte']] (Talk - Contact) 09:18, September 2, 2010 (UTC) # Gladiatoring 11:16, September 2, 2010 (UTC) # -[[User:Mariofighter3|'Mariofighter3: ']][[User talk:Mariofighter3|''' Open']] 11:23, September 2, 2010 (UTC) #Yeah, and pretty helpful too. [[User:GameGear360|'GG ]][[User talk:GameGear360|'''360]] 15:47, September 2, 2010 (UTC) # 06:19, September 3, 2010 (UTC) # 08:46, September 3, 2010 (UTC) # 11:44, September 3, 2010 (UTC) # 23:45, September 3, 2010 (UTC) #Sure. 23:51, September 3, 2010 (UTC) #Absolutely [[User:Agent Charge|'Agent']] [[User talk:Agent Charge|'Charge: ']] No Crime Stands on Brickipedia 19:25, September 7, 2010 (UTC) #I may not edit Brickipedia but cjc is a great editor and admin on Wikisimpsons so deserves the rights here from what I have seen of his contribs. ☆The Solar ☆ 20:25, September 9, 2010 (UTC) # 21:43, September 11, 2010 (UTC) Oppose Comments }}